2 good moves by Obama. Can we get a 3rd???

D_Holden_Maballs

Account Disabled
Joined
Feb 4, 2011
Posts
97
Media
0
Likes
2
Points
41
I agree 100% with the OP; Obama did two good things. I don't have too much of an opinion on waterboarding, though. I think it's definitely a cruel form of torture, and I think the U.S. is better than that. From what I hear, they are finding out that it really is counter productive to do, because the terrorist will give misinformation as a way to end their torture (and more information was gleaned from traditional interrogation methods as opposed to waterboarding, supposedly). Either way, I am really proud of Osama and our country right about now.
As for the picture, like someone mentioned, they will continue to be conspiracy theorists regardless of the picture being provided. Someone also said that it would be a good idea, but if the media got ahold of it and plastered it everwhere, that would be a diffent story. Well, not only would the national media plaster it everywhere, but the whole world would...it is a bigger deal than what some people are making it out to be. I felt shock, confusion, etc. with the announcement of his death, but I definitely believed he is dead. If not, you better damn well expect another "video" (which won't happen, because he is DEAD).
 

maxcok

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Posts
7,153
Media
0
Likes
125
Points
83
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Male
Will it stop all the doubters and deniers? No, nothing will stop ALL the doubters and deniers.
Exactly.

Will it satisfy some Americans' legitimate curiosity? I think so, but there will always be doubters.
I don't think "curiosity" is sufficient reason to incite retaliation from terrorists.

Nor do I think it's "legitimate" in these circumstances.

I see it as historical evidence that should be available to any American.
According to what authority?

The fact that they won't release the photo is suspect. Does it mean "conspiracy?" Not necessarily, but it is suspect none the less.
I presume you believe bin Laden is/was an actual living being responsible for horrific terrorist acts. Based on everything he's done in the past to promote his message and his movement, don't you think he'd release a videotaped message proving he's still around at his earliest opportunity? If he doesn't do that, say, in the next 2-3 weeks will you be satisfied that he's dead or at least neutralized?

I'm curious what your reasoning for not releasing them is?
The same as the president's, "It is important for us to make sure that very graphic photos of somebody who was shot in the head are not floating around as an incitement to additional violence or as a propaganda tool."

For godsake, read the NY Times article ColoradoGuy posted, and do your best to be sensible:
WASHINGTON — President Obama decided not to release graphic photographs of Osama bin Laden’s corpse because he was persuaded by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the release of the images would pose a national security risk, White House officials said on Wednesday.

“There is no doubt that we killed Osama bin Laden,” Mr. Obama said in an interview with the CBS News program “60 Minutes,” according to an excerpt of an interview that was read to reporters by Jay Carney, the White House press secretary. “We don’t need to spike the football.”

After intense discussions with his national security team, Mr. Obama decided that the photos were too graphic and could further enflame Bin Laden’s followers, Mr. Carney said, but would not change the minds of skeptics. Mr. Obama indicated in the interview that gloating by releasing the photos “is not who we are,” Mr. Carney said.

Some argued that no matter what the photos showed, they would not silence those who doubt that Bin Laden was killed in the American raid on a fortified house in Abbottabad, Pakistan, early on Monday, which the administration says is established beyond question. “The fact is, you will not see Osama bin Laden walking this earth again,” Mr. Obama said in the interview, according to the transcript.

Some lawmakers expressed similar views, saying that releasing the photos would serve little purpose and could endanger American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 
Last edited:

ColoradoGuy

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Posts
1,170
Media
35
Likes
1,467
Points
308
Location
Denver (Colorado, United States)
Verification
View
Gender
Male
Dancing in the streets and celebrating someone's death is equivalent to "spiking the football."

Showing one photograph of a real event is equivalent to "showing the replay," and that happens all the time.

Yet all over our media broadcasts were images of celebrating Americans similar to the images that were showed of Muslim's celebrating after 9/11. Not only did we "spike the football" we ran over to the sidelines and gave em the bird. We were allowed to see footage of "them" killing thousands of Americans, how can one photograph be any worse or more graphic?

Please show some common sense here. Just because there was dancing in the streets does not mean that the President or the military or his Cabinet endorsed it. I think you saw a lot of celebrations because there are a lot of families that have been affected by 9/11 and the subsequent events and the news came as a vindication or or as a relief. I felt like at least waving a flag in the streets... I had a nephew that was killed in Iraq. As far as I'm concerned, he would have never been in Iraq if it wasn't for the events of 9/11 and the (regrettable) decisions that were made in the wake of those events. So I understand the desire to celebrate, but don't be stupid and insinuate that the President asked people to get out in the streets and 'spike the football' for him.

What you saw the night of the announcement was a lot of media outlets predictably playing the only angle that they could: hometown celebrations by a public fed up with an ongoing war that has produced far too few results, cost far too much money and taken far too long to complete. If those media outlets had happened to have a camera crew in Islamabad, they might have shown public reaction there, too.

To your second point, showing any photographs of bin Laden's death was deemed by the President and his advisors to be potentially inflammatory and of no purpose. Read the NYT reference I posted earlier in this Thread. Just because some people suffer from blood-lust or have a morbid sense of curiosity doesn't mean we should indulge them. We don't have public executions for largely the same reason. I'm not sure where your reasoning comes from that it's similar to an instant replay on EPSN, but I would wager it isn't the by-product of thoughtful consideration.

I have to confess though: what really puzzles me is how you talk out of both sides of your mouth, balsary. In one breath, you want to criticize all those Americans who did rush out to celebrate OBL's death and in the next, you want to fan the flames, give them even more material to work with and celebrate over, and create an even bigger ruckus. Which is it?
 
Last edited:

ColoradoGuy

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Posts
1,170
Media
35
Likes
1,467
Points
308
Location
Denver (Colorado, United States)
Verification
View
Gender
Male
/snip/ Either way, I am really proud of Osama and our country right about now./snip/

It's happened several times in this Thread and others, but I think you meant "Obama". I think we're all proud of the President -- even a great majority of Republicans.
 

balsary

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Posts
1,805
Media
4
Likes
66
Points
193
Location
Indianapolis (Indiana, United States)
Gender
Male
It serves no legitimate interest, it is ghoulish and undignified, and it was judged by all those concerned in national security to aggravate the danger of terroristic acts against Americans.

This is a load of crap boner.

It serves no legitimate interest

It serves my interest, and many, many other Americans' interest. Who are you to decide whether that interest is legitimate or not?

it is ghoulish and undignified

All is necessary is a photograph of his dead body. This is no more ghoulish or undignified than an open casket is.

it was judged by all those concerned in national security to aggravate the danger of terroristic acts against Americans.

It was judged by all those concerned in the event. So now our government is more concerned with trying to keep people that supposedly hate us happy, while the concern of American citizens' is tossed aside?

Do you read what you write? You may have well said "because I told you so."
 
Last edited:

balsary

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Posts
1,805
Media
4
Likes
66
Points
193
Location
Indianapolis (Indiana, United States)
Gender
Male
Please show some common sense here. Just because there was dancing in the streets does not mean that the President or the military or his Cabinet endorsed it. I think you saw a lot of celebrations because there are a lot of families that have been affected by 9/11 and the subsequent events and the news came as a vindication or or as a relief. I felt like at least waving a flag in the streets... I had a nephew that was killed in Iraq. As far as I'm concerned, he would have never been in Iraq if it wasn't for the events of 9/11 and the (regrettable) decisions that were made in the wake of those events. So I understand the desire to celebrate, but don't be stupid and insinuate that the President asked people to get out in the streets and 'spike the football' for him.

What you saw the night of the announcement was a lot of media outlets predictably playing the only angle that they could: hometown celebrations by a public fed up with an ongoing war that has produced far too few results, cost far too much money and taken far too long to complete. If those media outlets had happened to have a camera crew in Islamabad, they might have shown public reaction there, too.

To your second point, showing any photographs of bin Laden's death was deemed by the President and his advisors to be potentially inflammatory and of no purpose. Read the NYT reference I posted earlier in this Thread. Just because some people suffer from blood-lust or have a morbid sense of curiosity doesn't mean we should indulge them. We don't have public executions for largely the same reason. I'm not sure where your reasoning comes from that it's similar to an instant replay on EPSN, but I would wager it isn't the by-product of thoughtful consideration.

I have to confess though: what really puzzles me is how you talk out of both sides of your mouth, balsary. In one breath, you want to criticize all those Americans who did rush out to celebrate OBL's death and in the next, you want to fan the flames, give them even more material to work with and celebrate over, and create an even bigger ruckus. Which is it?

Why would the President or anyone else have to endorse it for it to be wrong? I'm using the celebrating as an arguing point that if they can show the celebrating on the news, then they should be able to show ONE photo of a dead "terrorist group leader." The one photo doesn't "fan the flames" any more than the celebrating does. What the photo does do, is present documented evidence of an occurrence. While the celebrating may have made some feel better, broadcasting it all over served zero purpose.

It is you that is talking from both sides. I for one don't care if some "terrorist" on the other side of the world is offended by a photograph or celebrating. They don't have near the effect on my life as the people withholding this evidence.
 
Last edited:

maxcok

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Posts
7,153
Media
0
Likes
125
Points
83
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Male
Let me fix your post to Calboner:
Do you read what you write?

This is a load of crap balsary.

Nothing you've posted establishes anything other than a voyeuristic desire to see gruesome photos.

Let's think logically about what will happen if a photo of bin Laden with half his face blown off is released:
It makes us look ghoulish and barbaric.

It will certainly elicit revulsion throughout the Muslim world, and even in the non-Muslim world.

It will certainly incite violence and retaliation among extremists and create more extremists.

It will put our troops and even American citizens traveling abroad in increased danger of violence.

It will be plastered all over the media for months and years, dissected, analyzed and argued over.

It will keep bin Laden in the spotlight, at the top of the news, and make him more of a 'martyr'.

It will do nothing to silence the doubters and conspiracy theorists, as even you acknowledge.
What have you got, other than morbid curiosity and an imaginary "right" to see (inconclusive) classified evidence?
 
Last edited:

ColoradoGuy

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Posts
1,170
Media
35
Likes
1,467
Points
308
Location
Denver (Colorado, United States)
Verification
View
Gender
Male
Why would the President or anyone else have to endorse it for it to be wrong? I'm using the celebrating as an arguing point that if they can show the celebrating on the news, then they should be able to show ONE photo of a dead "terrorist group leader." The one photo doesn't "fan the flames" any more than the celebrating does. What the photo does do, is present documented evidence of an occurrence. While the celebrating may have made some feel better, broadcasting it all over served zero purpose.

It is you that are talking from both sides. I for one don't care if some "terrorist" on the other side of the world is offended by a photograph or celebrating. They don't have near the effect on my life as the people withholding this evidence.

I think you might just have a sick desire to see blood and gore, which could mean you are a very sick fuck, but that's your business. Seek it out if you want to (perhaps check into the Faces of Death video series... it's billed as a 'must see' for death voyeurs).

However, as has been pointed out several times in this Thread, you clearly do not understand basic politics. In the meantime, while you're potentially salivating over the opportunity to see a dime-sized hole in a dead terrorist's head, pundits are applauding the President's decision to not release the photos. Read this editorial in US News or this piece in New America Media or this commentary in the Christian Science Monitor.
 

conntom

Cherished Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Posts
2,170
Media
1
Likes
252
Points
208
Location
Boston (Massachusetts, United States)
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Well - we agree on the pictures Max.... One small step for you today.

Maybe tomorrow you will see some more things the right way.

As for the US claiming the moral high ground.... c'mon.

There is no moral high ground when it comes to survival. Do what you must to survive. Kill, torture or what have you and stay on top. The world is a rough place. It's even worse when you're on the bottom. Libs seem to think we can all have a nice happy world. That is a laughable dream libbies!

When libs let go of their childish dreams and ideas of a perfect Thomas Moore Utopia like planet - maybe they will adjust their thinking.

Even if you guys had your perfect world - in a generation it would be at war again.

Now Mr. President, please stop investigating those who worked hard to keep our country safe.
 

joshua_ste

1st Like
Joined
Mar 5, 2011
Posts
72
Media
5
Likes
1
Points
43
Sexuality
60% Straight, 40% Gay
Gender
Male
I guess I have a split mind on this one.

One of the reasons the bin Laden body was buried at sea was because if the body were allowed to be buried in ground, in a specific "place", that place could then be used as a rallying point for demonstrations and by radicals who wished to politicize the masses.

The whole Obama doctrine of "Tone it down" or "Dial it back" (don't inflame) can be seen in almost all the White House decisions. That nutjob in Gainesville Florida burning the Quran is an extreme example of what the Obama administration is trying to curtail: terrorist recruitment.

The whole idea of closing Guantanamo (besides the part that it's unamerican & illegal -- "the US can make up its own rules! International law does not apply to us") sprung from evidence that just the fact of Guantanamo and waterboarding acted as one of the largest recruitment tools for Al Qaeda. Obviously the President was given compelling reasons for keeping it open or he would have closed it as promised.

One of the reasons that the country is so divided is that a good chunk of GOP/conservatives believe that the United States should not be dictated to by anyone; that Al Qaeda or any terrorist organization should not be setting the terms of the debate as to what the United States should or should not do. Many GOP/conservatives even get queasy when Obama slightly bows to royalty or observes another country's protocol. Or thinks globally, acknowledging that the U.S. is one country among many, without the swaggering John Wayne go-it-alone mindset. Obama then becomes a pussy or a wimp or a "ditherer", a leader afraid to "take charge". Somehow we have to find a balance between not inflaming radicals, yet not allowing every radical Islamist with a small following to define the terms of the debate.


Posting dead bin Laden photos is total swagger, a "fuck you" to the Middle East, imperial ego.
 
Last edited:

balsary

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Posts
1,805
Media
4
Likes
66
Points
193
Location
Indianapolis (Indiana, United States)
Gender
Male
If anyone wants to discuss the two sides of this, I'm all for it. If insulting intelligence, and fabricating fetishes is your way of arguing a point, then I have nothing to say to you.

When someone can refute what I've said with facts or logical reasoning, I welcome the discussion.
 

conntom

Cherished Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Posts
2,170
Media
1
Likes
252
Points
208
Location
Boston (Massachusetts, United States)
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
When you disagree with some people on here, balsary, all you will ever get is insults and such. Quite a shame considering they seem to consider themselves so enlightened.

Anyways - as someone said, the photos will be leaked at some point so they will be out for people to see, the WH can say they didn't authorize it and some people will look over the photos and find some reason to believe they are fake.

Until there is reason to think this whole thing didn't happen, I believe OBL is dead.

I understand where you are coming from though. Release the photos. Those who want to see can. We are all adults. We can handle it. And in the great American tradition, if you don;t want to see them - don't look. I get where you're coming from and to a point I agree. Just - if I had to make the call, I just don't see the need (speaking only for myself of course)
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Why would the President or anyone else have to endorse it for it to be wrong? I'm using the celebrating as an arguing point that if they can show the celebrating on the news, then they should be able to show ONE photo of a dead "terrorist group leader." The one photo doesn't "fan the flames" any more than the celebrating does. What the photo does do, is present documented evidence of an occurrence. While the celebrating may have made some feel better, broadcasting it all over served zero purpose.

It is you that are talking from both sides. I for one don't care if some "terrorist" on the other side of the world is offended by a photograph or celebrating. They don't have near the effect on my life as the people withholding this evidence.

But we've all saw the celebrating... in some ways, the excessive celebrating. Thousands upon thousands of people, many of which who didn't suffer any loss of loved ones during 9/11 or the two wars, jumping around feverishly and singing songs over the death of one of the world's most infamous terrorists in some crazed bout of nationalistic pride. As someone who has lived in NYC before, during and after the attack, only about 30 minutes away from Ground Zero, I couldn't help but think that some of those images were pretty tacky. Hell, I already saw a club flyer for an "Obama Killed Osama" party this weekend. Doubly tacky. It reminded me of the celebratory footage I saw in the Middle East the day after the attacks. I didn't like it then when the shoe was on the other feet and I don't like the obsessive celebrations now. It's not in me to celebrate the death of anyone, regardless of how wicked they are. And parading a photo like Beelzebub doesn't interest me one bit.

So in some ways we have already fanned the flames. You want to do it more by showing a photo just to satisfy some people's sadistic needs to see a dead body? And before it comes up, the argument that we see this kind of violence on TV, in movies and in video games all the time is a weak one. That's because we all know that is fantasy. Fantasy allows us to diverge into darker things knowing that we're ultimately not doing something wrong. When that line crosses into reality, the fun disappears and it's then we need to really question our motives.
 

conntom

Cherished Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Posts
2,170
Media
1
Likes
252
Points
208
Location
Boston (Massachusetts, United States)
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
I actually agree with VB a bit.

I was made a bit uncomfortable seeing people celebrate.

To me, you nod, smile to yourself and go home knowing a bad end came to a bad man and that was a good thing.

No jumping, yelling or celebrating. They did that when we were hit. I wanted to drop a bomb on each and every human I saw celebrating that day. We don't have to be that disgusting. We're Americans.
 

balsary

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Posts
1,805
Media
4
Likes
66
Points
193
Location
Indianapolis (Indiana, United States)
Gender
Male
But we've all saw the celebrating... in some ways, the excessive celebrating. Thousands upon thousands of people, many of which who didn't suffer any loss of loved ones during 9/11 or the two wars, jumping around feverishly and singing songs over the death of one of the world's most infamous terrorists in some crazed bout of nationalistic pride. As someone who has lived in NYC before, during and after the attack, only about 30 minutes away from Ground Zero, I couldn't help but think that some of those images were pretty tacky. Hell, I already saw a club flyer for an "Obama Killed Osama" party this weekend. Doubly tacky. It reminded me of the celebratory footage I saw in the Middle East the day after the attacks. I didn't like it then when the shoe was on the other feet and I don't like the obsessive celebrations now. It's not in me to celebrate the death of anyone, regardless of how wicked they are. And parading a photo like Beelzebub doesn't interest me one bit.

So in some ways we have already fanned the flames. You want to do it more by showing a photo just to satisfy some people's sadistic needs to see a dead body? And before it comes up, the argument that we see this kind of violence on TV, in movies and in video games all the time is a weak one. That's because we all know that is fantasy. Fantasy allows us to diverge into darker things knowing that we're ultimately not doing something wrong. When that line crosses into reality, the fun disappears and it's then we need to really question our motives.

Thanks for a legitimate reply. Sounds like we at least agree that the celebrating was wrong. I for one would like to see evidence that is more conclusive than what has been presented. If that comes in the form of a photograph of a dead body then so be it. We can already see thousands of images of dead bodies (real dead bodies, not Hollywood) all over the internet. Most of those images serve no purpose than to satisfy this morbid obsession everyone keeps claiming. If it were wanting to see the body, just for the sake of seeing a dead body I would understand your point, but this dead body in particular has meaning. Since releasing the photo has a purpose other than "fanning the flames" I don't see what the problem is. We do so much to fan those flames already, with actions that serve no justifiable purpose.
 

ColoradoGuy

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Posts
1,170
Media
35
Likes
1,467
Points
308
Location
Denver (Colorado, United States)
Verification
View
Gender
Male
I actually agree with VB a bit.

I was made a bit uncomfortable seeing people celebrate.

To me, you nod, smile to yourself and go home knowing a bad end came to a bad man and that was a good thing.

No jumping, yelling or celebrating. They did that when we were hit. I wanted to drop a bomb on each and every human I saw celebrating that day. We don't have to be that disgusting. We're Americans.

I agree with that as well... but I understand the motivation. Anybody who actually read my post understands why I understand the motivation. For the record, I didn't celebrate. I made phone calls to family members who I knew would have a reaction to the news and I listened to them and shared their grief.

I'm 100% with conntom that we don't have to stoop to that behavior. Because we are Americans, we hold ourselves to a higher standard of conduct. We don't react to somebody else's evil with evil of our own.

I also agree with joshua_ste's points about why releasing the photos is unnecessary. As he said:

/snip/Posting dead bin Laden photos is total swagger, a "fuck you" to the Middle East, imperial ego./snip/
 

ColoradoGuy

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Posts
1,170
Media
35
Likes
1,467
Points
308
Location
Denver (Colorado, United States)
Verification
View
Gender
Male
I for one would like to see evidence that is more conclusive than what has been presented. If that comes in the form of a photograph of a dead body then so be it. We can already see thousands of images of dead bodies (real dead bodies, not Hollywood) all over the internet. Most of those images serve no purpose than to satisfy this morbid obsession everyone keeps claiming. If it were wanting to see the body, just for the sake of seeing a dead body I would understand your point, but this dead body in particular has meaning. Since releasing the photo has a purpose other than "fanning the flames" I don't see what the problem is. We do so much to fan those flames already, with actions that serve no justifiable purpose.

If you agree that the flames have been fanned, why do you insist on releasing a photo that every person but you thinks will just enrage the jihadists overseas?

Other than "I for one would like to see evidence that is more conclusive than what has been presented" you do not present ANY logic for why this is necessary. I have no choice but to assume your personal curiosity trumps national security, international diplomacy, and common sense. And that, balsary, makes no sense. None. Zip.

If you think the President of the United States is lying, just say so. If you think Osama bin Laden is alive, just say so. But don't imply that your personal approval is required for the machinations of state to work correctly.

Further, why didn't you choose to refute or argue even one of maxcok's points?

Let's think logically about what will happen if a photo of bin Laden with half his face blown off is released:
It makes us look ghoulish and barbaric.

It will certainly elicit revulsion throughout the Muslim world, and even in the non-Muslim world.

It will certainly incite violence and retaliation among extremists and create more extremists.

It will put our troops and even American citizens traveling abroad in increased danger of violence.

It will be plastered all over the media for months and years, dissected, analyzed and argued over.

It will keep bin Laden in the spotlight, at the top of the news, and make him more of a 'martyr'.

It will do nothing to silence the doubters and conspiracy theorists, as even you acknowledge.
What have you got, other than morbid curiosity and an imaginary "right" to see (inconclusive) classified evidence?

Indeed... "what have you got, other than your morbid curiosity and an imaginary "right" to see (inconclusive) classified evidence?"

We're not inventing fetishes for you... it seems to be the only thing you're interested in. You're the one who refuses to refute facts, articles posted, opinions cited, and commentary relayed. And it comes down to some very simple questions: Why is this? Is it an inability to confront an overwhelming argument? Do you feel compelled to just argue for sport? Do you really believe you're smarter than the entire Executive Branch of the Federal Government?